Pictures and suspenstion tuning

Hoosier reccomends 31-34 psi hot for the A6.

The pressures in the original post, warm or cold?

sachilles wrote: I think it might be worth figuring out if the tire size is suitable for the rim width. Since the picture only shows the outside of the rim, and the inside is in the shadow. The air pressures aren't THAT low, that is why I suspect maybe the rim is a little wide for the tire.

They should be fine. Wheels were custom made to fit Hoosiers recomendation for the tire. Yeah, they're just rolling that far.They don't look stretched like that when they're at rest.

alfadriver wrote: What caster are you running? If you can run a lot more caster, then you can get some dynamic camber- as in turn the wheel, and caster generates camber as the wheel changes direction. That gives you more camber in corners, and less while braking- a good thing, mostly (if you can handle the extra steering effort).

I haven't measured, but maxed it out since Nationals. That was the easiest change. I actually did it in Paddoc in Lincoln before I ran the local region's "second chance" event. I was much more competative there with a little more air in the tires and a lot more caster.

And thanks for the other comments. I know this is basic stuff, but I'm really just learning. Really appreciate all of you taking time to help.

iceracer wrote: Hoosier reccomends 31-34 psi hot for the A6.

Hum. That's good to know. I should have stopped by the Hoosier trailer and asked them for some input.

sachilles wrote: The pressures in the original post, warm or cold?

Yes. That's where I started them, then blead off any pressure build up after each run.

Can you run RCA's legally?,traction brackets in the rear?,if you can't go heims in the rear I think it was T3 or whiteline that makes adjustable upper arms to correct pinion angles.They are poly bushed though and I think you can see I'm not a fan for the rear of these cars.Perhaps if you used those adjustable poly uppers try stock lower rubber bushings to allow some additional axle rotation.Trust me when you get the front to really work you'll need that rear end to float well to maximise the rear grip from both rear tires,leave the rear springs alon for the time being untill your happy with the front. Btw what dampers are you running?,hopefully koni race. The easiest/quickest change you can make to see if its the right direction is to stick a pair of 650 or 700lb springs up front(I use afco as they are reasonably priced and accurate) and try it.I never ran my car with anything stiffer than 550's up front but mine was about 600lbs lighter than yours.

In reply to kevlarcorolla:

Can't run RCAs. Seems weird, but that's the rules.

I've seen those "traction brackets" before, but I don't really understand what they're for. I'd have to go through the rules and see if there's anything that would allow them.

I can use heim jonts for upper arms, but lowers have to stay stock. I'll build those, but want to do the panhard bar first so I can get the roll center down.

Struts up front are Koni 8610s. In the rear it's Koni SAs for a Mustang of some kind with polly lower bushings. Got the part numbers from that thread on Club 4AG. They work great, but are very long. Makes it a pain to jack up the car, but makes it darn easy to change springs!

Speaking of springs, I just looked at the T3 site to look at those brackets you mention. They show that they have 6k Swift springs and they look linear. I'll call Gabe about them. I have the 6.5k Swift springs in it but they sure look progressive to me. I saw a great post somewhere where someone used their chassis scales and a press to test springs. I'll need to do that and see for sure, but the 6k springs look good. I may give that a shot with some 650s up front and see where that gets me.

Thanks!

Didn't think you could run rca's,silly scca rules-our rule book up here in the great white north went from about 30 pages to over 300 with the change to scca ruleset-I for sure haven't bothered to read it through. You mention the panhard again,so how exactly is building a new panhard bar going to lower your roll center?.I would expect if you can't run rca's up front they will crap a muffin if you start building brackets on the diff/chassis to lower the panhard. The traction brackets lower the axle end of the lower control arm to compensate for the lower ride height and return the bar to around the same angle as stock,I tried with and without and I can't say for sure it made much difference. Why are you looking at 6k springs?,650's are around 12k of the top of my head.

If the damper is that long have you checked to make sure you can't bottom them out?.

Street Prepared lets you do a LOT with a solid rear axle. There's a special allowance for it. Yup, you can't run RCAs up front, but you can weld all kinda nonsense to the rear of the car. Lower the panhard bar, put in a Watts Link, or even more exotic than that. Pretty much any method of lateral control you want. I think it was stuck in at some point when solid axles were becoming less common and people running older cars wanted something to help them keep up. Once it got in, it stayed. Kind of like front sway bars being open in "stock". Weird, but that's how it is.

The Street Prepared rules can be odd, but I think they're pretty good. You can build a "race car" that you can tune a bit with proper springs and ride hight, but it's restrictive enough that you don't end up with $100k invested in it. If it wasn't for the weird rules, weird cars like mine would never make sense. Not that it really makes sense now, but at least it can be done!

kevlarcorolla wrote: Why are you looking at 6k springs?,650's are around 12k of the top of my head.

Sorry, for the rear, not the front.

kevlarcorolla wrote: If the damper is that long have you checked to make sure you can't bottom them out?.

Yes, but I'm going to check again. One thing about the Celica (at least the coupe, not sure about the hatch) vs. the Corolla, the shocks are installed at an angle. Pretty steep, really. So when the suspension compresses, the shock doesn't move as much as it would if it were more upright.

But I am going to check travel front and rear this weekend just to be sure I'm not having a problem there.

6k rear springs,thats better.-for sure without a doubt you need linear springs.Before I converted to rear coilovers I used 4.7k trd race springs but combined with the stock rear bar(rules thing). Good to hear the panhard can be lowered legally,to make enough of a difference to feel plan on going level with the bottom of the pumkin.Remember to brace the chassis mount well,lots of load with that sticky rubber. Btw if your handy I'd look at building your own camber plates,must be able to get more camber with a different design,I built a set of top mounts that worked great with additional wheel travel and plenty of camber without having to cut into the tower.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: By the way, there was an awesome Saturn in FSP. Really, really nicely put together too. He had trouble getting the power down - all the grip in Lincoln had his inside front too light. Otherwise I think he'd have done really well. He beat me, but then, that's not saying much. lol

Interesting. Looks like it wasn't a full-effort build. Wonder what he did to the motor. In theory, they can make around 160whp/160wtq in FSP trim and not weigh too much... probably ~2100lbs for the proper model (1995 SC1 w/ update/backdate to Sx2 drivetrain). Front suspension geometry is a big limitation though.

I assume Civics dominated this year again? I haven't followed any *sp classes for a while.